On 26.07.2010 17:40, Martin wrote:
On 26/07/2010 16:34, Sven Barth wrote:
It's not about not having to type the "fully qualified name", but
about not having to rename/prefix my own units, because they conflict
with an existing unit.
Ok, so that means:
If refering to the unit, or any element in it, you always have to use
the full namespace:
uses my.utils;
var a: my.utils.TFoo;
that is, inside the unit that uses the other unit, the other units name
is effectively "my.utils" => with the dot being part of the name
If writing a unit, that is to be in a namespace you can do
unit utils namespace my;
but that is no different from doing
unit my.utils;
Not exactly, because
1)
"unit utils namespace my" resides in "utils.pas"
while
"unit my.utils" resides in "my.utils.pas" (Delphi compatible).
(no usage of compiler switch -Un here)
That is a question of who the compiler is implemented to interpret this.
"unit my.utils" could well reside in utils.pas
You're right... it could be defined like that as well.
2)
You can still do a
uses
utils;
with the namespace approach. The namespace-identifier is only needed
if you want/need to avoid a conflict.
Now we are going in circles....
that is the whole point I have been making for several males.
The use of not fully qualified unit names is pure evil => it leads to
mis interpretion by the reader.
Telling the implementor, that he can use "sysutils" as unit name, will
lead to the implementor doing eaxtly this => and the reader will be
confused
Eh... right... there was something... shame on me.
Regards,
Sven
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
